“In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of man be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved his title. Do not lose your knowledge that man’s proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it’s yours.” – JOHN GALT

2010 Elections

Most of the economic platforms of the presidential candidates are mainly concerned with distribution, not production.

Why vote?

It is very unfortunate that all of the presidentiables are a bunch of compromisers, trapos (traditional politicians), and incompetents. I’ve read their platforms and all of them do not offer any concrete plan of action. In terms of economic matters, they merely recite platitudes of pleasant words and abstractions without giving any concrete plan of action. For instance, all of them say they are for job creation and economic progress. These are not concretes but merely abstractions. They all refuse to address the interrogative word “how!” How are they going to create jobs and achieve economic progress? What political-economic system is consistent with this goal? Can they achieve it by means of imposing more economic controls and regulations? Can they achieve it by means of imposing anti-trust laws to address what they call cement cartel, oil cartel, rice cartel, pharmaceutical cartel, and other alleged cartels in the country? More controls and regulations mean economic socialism. The Philippines is a mixed economy bordering on dictatorship.

BLOG ARTICLES ON THE UPCOMING 2010 ELECTIONS:

Sen. Richard Gordon may not be the best choice for president of the Philippines, but he has courage, honesty, determination, and most importantly, experience, to serve this country. When I say service, I mean “service” of the individual rights of every citizen and “service” of good and justice. HE IS THE MORAL CHOICE!

What are my criteria for saying that Gordon, former mayor of Olongapo City and former chairman and administrator of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority, is so far the best choice for the highest elective seat in the land? My criteria are as follows:

Gordon’s got the experience. He was the chairman of SBMA from 1992 to 1998 wherein he pushed for the Special Economic Zone, which was designed to encourage economic growth in the area. Under his chairmanship Gordon was able to woo local and foreign investors, some of which were Fortune 500 companies, to do business in Subic Bay, which resulted in $2.1 billion in investments and around 200,000 jobs created. As Tourism Secretary Gordon believed that “Tourism means jobs. Gordon is a “walk the talk” guy.

In my opinion the Party-list System is just one of the constitutional by-products of the rise of liberalism and leftist activism in the past four to five decades. Liberalism and political activism exponentially grew during the term of dictator Ferdinand Marcos. Although the late strongman claimed that his dictatorship sought to address the rise of communism in the country, his fascist rule produced the opposite, as he instead radicalized the people, particularly young people, and drove them to go underground, which led to the formation of socialist-inspired counter-revolution and counter-propaganda aimed at the Marcosian dictatorship. The fall of Marcos was said to have averted the continued rise of socialism during the early period of 1980s, as the United States chose to intervene and then installed Corazon Aquino as the country’s revolutionary president.

Electing political candidates who seek public office is a moral act. We elect according to our evaluation of the facts of reality, specifically political reality, and we choose the ones who deserve our votes according to our value judgment. Our choice affects our lives, our society as a whole, and our future. It cannot be denied that there are some people who choose to evade responsibility and who refuse to think, blanking out the fact that their right of suffrage is not simply about sending a selected few to political office, but most importantly about ensuring the freedom and liberty of their posterity. Unfortunately, there are those who base their votes on money, while others rely on ‘bahala na’ attitude, as they ‘feel’ that election process is merely a social activity that happens after every three years.

I have written various blogs on some presidentiables vying for the highest position of the land. Among the subjects of my ‘election’ blogs are presidential candidates Noynoy Aquino, Joseph Estrada, Gilbert Teodoro, and Manuel Villar. I risk being accused of political bias, but let me tell you that I chose these four presidential candidates because I think they are really the ones competing for political power. But make no mistake; I’m not comfortable with their politics, which have all the trappings of statism or collectivism, which means BIG GOVERNMENT.

As the old saying goes, ‘you know one when you see one. And this is exactly the case as the most ardent advocates of population control have compiled a list of politicians running for public office this May 10 national elections who made an either expressed or implied support to the controversial Reproductive Health bill that would force both employers and doctors to provide RH services to designated beneficiaries against their will.

In our age, it must be observed that technology has brought both local and national elections to a different level. Technology is most important to national candidates, especially those who seek the presidency. The Internet, for example, is an infinite domain of ideas. National politicians can invest in cyber-publicity to boost their image and increase their level of popularity among voters. Some of the new media technologies that can help boost the image and popularity of presidential bets are social network sites like Facebook and Friendster, blogsites like WordPress and Multiply, video-sharing channels like YouTube, and websites.

A grand Imam in the southern part of the country issued a fatwa, a ruling on a point of Islamic law given by a recognized authority, against three national candidates for being anti-Islam. In an Inquirer report, Marawi City grand imam Ustadz Jamel Yahya issued the edict against presidential candidate Joseph Estrada, senatorial candidate Franklin Drilon and vice presidential bet Mar Roxas.

I’m not comfortable with the politics of Noynoy, especially with the kind of people who flock around him. In fact, it’s not clear where Noynoy stands in various issues. But I must admit I like his sister, Kris Aquino, as an entertainer and a television host. Kris’ got talent. She is defined by her unique attitude and individuality. She’s got the “K” factor or “karisma” (charisma).

I’d like to think that the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) is merely responding to the gripes and complaints of those victimized by state agents. This is the essence of a free or semi-free society. Yes, the communists are guilty morally, but this doesn’t mean that they are not entitled to the protection of our laws. In a free society, everybody is equal under the law and before the court of justice. A free society is an informed society. The true essence of equality is that people have equal access to our legal system and courts, that they are guaranteed equal protection under the law, and that they are accorded fair and impartial treatment by the government regardless of their status, rank, beliefs, ideology, race, religion, sex, and condition.

Whether you believe it or not, this presidential elections is all about incumbent President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Lest I be misunderstood, I’d like to make it clear that I’m speaking from realpolitik, pragmatic point of view in that if the presidentiables would like to be the next commander-in-chief of this already bankrupt Banana Republic, the best and only route to power is through the unpopular president.

Yes, there’s no doubt that administration’s presidential bet epitomizes cleverness and intellect. He’s a lawyer and I know that he understands what he’s talking about. Like all of his presidential contenders, Mr. Teodoro peddled some nice-to-hear proposals that could give him more votes in the upcoming 2010 national polls. However, one of his dangerous proposals is his plan to implement a universal health care system in the Philippines.

Election, particularly Philippine election, is all aboutemotional appeal and mass psychology. Most politicians, especially the clever ones, are mass psychologists. They know what people want to hear, and this understanding gives them the knowledge on the most effective and emotionally appealing pro-poor campaign strategy to fool the people. Our political history has it that most people in these parts want to see and hear pro-poor, anti-corruption, anti-capitalist campaign slogans.

I do believe Sen. Jamby Madrigal is a political troll, but her new allegation against presidential candidate Sen. Manny Villar is simply the latest appendage to a series of corruption and bribery charges designed to paint him as a power luster who will do everything to steal the presidency.

Evolution not revolution. This is the strategy that is being used by the Marxists to take control of the nation’s political and economic powers through the help of our Constitution and the “useful idiots” in politics. We have been witnessing the advance of socialism in this country since the New Constitution, which was founded upon the anti-concepts of progressiveness, political correctness and egalitarianism, took effect in 1987.

Today the Filipino commemorates the first and second Edsa revolutions. The first saw the downfall of a ruthless tyrant who ruled the nation for over two decades under that statist political slogan “New Society”, while the second resulted in a disgraceful overthrow of a plunderer who relied on that pro-poor mantra “Erap Para sa Mahirap” (Erap for the poor). Dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos corrupted both the nation’s coffers and soul, while former President Joseph Estrada committed two great sins— betrayal of public trust and betrayal of one’s soul.

Now there’s a circulating e-mail that contains intriguing pictures of an unknown mansion. The e-mail starts with the question: “Who owns a house like this?” and then showed various pictures of the purported mansion, which had opulent Victorian-style interiors. Then the email asks the following intriguing query: “Imagine who would have such taste and live in such opulence?”

An American Billionaire?

A Saudi Prince?

Louis XIV of France ?

Savour the pictures then scroll to the bottom of the page to see who owns this Work of Art.

Administration’s vice-presidential candidate and movie actor Edu Manzano blames the rise of the call center industry for young people’s lack of interest in pursuing higher learning. In an Inquirer report, the actor-turned-politician expressed concern that the country’s biggest job creator is pulling young people away from professional disciplines. “To be globally competitive, what is being looked at today is having PhDs (and the) mechanisms where students are active (and) vying for higher learning,” he said during a forum held at the University of the Perpetual Help System in Binan, Laguna.

A right is absolute in the sense that you are entitled to such right as a human being and as an individual in a free society. No one has the right to deprive you of your rights, not even the government. But what kind of right is absolute? These are the rights enumerated under Article I (bill of rights) of our 1987 constitution. Article III, Section 1 is the paramount of all rights, to wit: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

A blog commenter asked whether a public employee and a private individual have equal rights and privileges with respect to election laws. Since I am defending media personalities’ and celebrities right to free speech and to campaign for candidates, this commenter asked why public employees are prohibited from exercising the same right. As for public employees, I have stated that they are prohibited from engaging in “political partisan activity” and electioneering.

In a free society, no one must be singled out by any law, edict or directive. But in this country, there is a law that prohibits celebrities and media personalities to voluntarily campaign for their candidates. This law is euphemistically named Fair Elections Act or Republic Act No. 9006. I object to certain provisions of this Act because it deprives a certain group of individuals of their right to free speech and to campaign for their political choices.

After the notoriously corrupt Second Division of the Commission on Elections betrayed the will of the Filipino voters by replacing democratically elected governors of three provinces with three known allies of President Macapagal Arroyo, poll body officials are now threatening movie stars, celebrities, and TV personalities for endorsing their candidates.

It’s not surprising that the friars of the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPRCV) supported this revolting Comelec mandate by calling on celebrities like Kris Aquino, Dolphy and Willie Revillame, and so on to go on leave from their television shows if they continue to endorse candidates.

Many of us in these parts wonder why the Philippines remain a poor country despite the fact that it is the only Christian country in Asia. It is not religion that will save a country from any political, economic or social disaster- it is the men and women who value the right and proper idea- the idea that for men to live on earth, he must choose the right philosophy and cherish the ideals of liberty and individual rights. What most people don’t know is that any religion, whether it be Christianity, Islam, or Buddhism, is based on an idea that man is a determined, helpless being who must submit his life to a divine supernatural entity they call God.

In terms of economic platform, Mr. Teodoro simply spouts vague generalities and floating abstractions. He highlights the importance of “innovation” without concretizing the ways and methods by which to achieve this goal. The question that should be asked is: What particular economic system is consistent with “innovation?” He does not elaborate.

I’m not a Noynoy Aquino supporter, but I have to admit really I admire his sister Kris for being a great TV host and an exciting actress. I’m a big fan of the best television host and the most popular icon in the entertainment industry today. But politics is different from entertainment. Yes, Noynoy is not my bet for the presidency. In fact, I’ve been campaigning for his defeat, along with the rest of the presidential candidates. But I think what I just saw on Facebook is an affront to reason, sanity, and justice.

Do they do it regularly or in a daily basis? Of course not! Election period is the time when political maniacs or TRAPOS (traditional politicians) pull on disgusting, distasteful stunt to fool the people. They say a picture speaks a thousand words. Well, it’s your turn to make something of this pathetic “candid” photo (really?) of Senator and vice-presidential candidate Loren Legarda. Although he speaks of both domestic and foreign direct investments, he is still mum on what concrete economic system he would apply in order to keep foreign investors had he been elected president of the country.

We are all engaged in a battle of ideas. Your years of military service is in pursuant to your sacred oath as the protector of our Constitution and of people’s individual rights. In your hands you held the freedom, liberty and the rights of men in this country that is now bordering on dictatorship and socialism. You must be proud of this very rare achievement.

Is there any connection between the degree of a country’s freedom and the security and happiness of its people? Is there any possible correlation between a country’s degree and appreciation of liberty and rights and the outcome of natural calamities and man-made devastation? Do we have to look at the functions (e.g. controls and regulations) of the government if protecting the rights and happiness of every individual is our main goal? My answer is Yes, Yes, Yes!

In his February 4 column, the most read columnist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer eloquently wrote that “money” is the “root of all evil.” Conrado de Quiros acrimoniously lambasted billionaire Senator and presidential candidate Manny Villar whose appearance in the Senate on February 2 “did not lack for cleverness.”

What are the similarities between the infamous National Broadband (NBN) Project that implicated President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, her husband and a number of high-ranking government officials and the embattled C-5 road project that is currently hounding billionaire Senator and presidentiable Manny Villar? The common denominator between the two multi-billion scams in recent political history of the country are the following…

The worst crime committed by Manny Villar is his shameless, disgraceful breach of the free-market system. If Villar wins the presidential elections, how can foreign investors trust a President who is known in the country as a “robber baron?” This year’s election must not only be focused on the neck-and-neck rivalry between Villar and Senator Noynoy Aquino; we must also look at the disturbing tale of two competing roads— the C-5 road that is a clear by-product of “robber baron” politics and the MCTEP or the Manila-Cavite Toll Express Way Project, which is being funded and built by private contractors through the build-operate-transfer (BOT) scheme.

Despite the fact that the Supreme Court, in one of its historic, landmark decisions, declared that convicted plunderer and ousted president Joseph Estrada “constructively resigned” as president during the EDSA II revolt, the Commission on Elections, in a highly controversial decision, junked all three disqualification cases filed against the former chief executive for lack of merit, allowing him to run for president again in the May 2010 elections.

At first, I must admit that I was reluctant to answer your question since honestly, none of the presidential candidates is worthy of the vote of a freedom-loving individual. Again, the electorate has no choice but to choose among a bunch of evils.

Lest I be misunderstood, I must share with you the kind of a leader that deserves the support not only of Objectivists, but also of every rational voter in this country.

“Need” is the weapon being used by Chavez to further the advance of statism and dictatorship in Venezuela, while the word “sacrifice” is being used as a magic word to fool and appease the people. Chavez wants to be the state—and that wants to canonize the state as Venezuelans’ ever-benevolent Deity that provides everything that the people need. Since people’s “need” and “social welfare” is the battle cry that now reigns throughout Venezuela, the government assumes the role of a sole provider of the people. Chavez government provides such services as education, health care, food rations, and even family allowances. The results of this altruistic economic policy are inflation, devaluation of the bolivar currency, exodus of professionals and able men, and deep economic crisis.

I’VE finally heard and seen the worst political slogan ever invented in (and, God forbid, for) this country. This political slogan—which should be described as the stupidest, the dumbest, the scariest, and the most Nazistic slogan—ever conceived for the coming 2010 elections is not an appeal to reason, but a desperate attempt to tinker people’s gullibility and emotion. “COUNTRY ABOVE SELF!” Of all baloney words in the dictionary and of all stupid, passé mottoes popular among teenagers, presidential aspirant Noynoy Aquino and his teammate Mar Roxas, both eager to replace a sitting despot in Malacañang palace, came up with this despondent, ludicrous political stunt to fool or soothe the people.

I SELDOM google the names of presidential candidates or any politician running for office this coming 2010 elections. In the past few days, I searched at least three presidential candidates and was appalled to know that none of them offer a concrete political platform. All of them prattle on about absurd principles, policies, and compromising stand on a number of crucial issues. I think that the only interesting thing about the coming polls is that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is going to end her tumultuous, questionable stay in power. Unfortunately, nobody offers concrete government programs and clear-cut stand on such crucial issues as economy, peace and order, Mindanao issue, corruption, governance, and individual rights. This is perhaps the reason why I failed to register, but thanks to the decision of the Supreme Court extending voters’ registration up to January 9 or 120 days before the scheduled May 10 elections.

NO, I won’t vote for the Kabataan Party. But this is not the reason why I’m sending you this message. I observed that most members of this group belong to Generation X. Yes, perhaps you might ask me or your friends if I or they am/are voting for a party that claims to be the vanguard of the youth. The answer should be NO. Before we vote, we may ask ourselves, “Why should I vote?”- “who should I vote for?”- “for what?” To answer these questions I believe we should know that a science exists which we can use to integrate things and ideas. Philosophy. In the run-up to the 2010 elections, we continue to absorb mixed premises, undefined generalities, absurd contradictions, and compromising ideals and principles from candidates running for different public positions.

The 1987 Constitution may have limited the evils of martial law and the rise of a potential dictatorship, but one of its numerous fatal flaws is that it legalizes political ‘balkanization’ in the Philippines. What do I mean by the term political balkanization? In politics, some absurd provisions of the new charter encourage the formation of fly-by-night political parties and fragmented party-list groups for the special purpose of elections. Unknown to many, particularly well-meaning Filipinos and the Leftists, this system creates a very dangerous situation wherein competing political groups with undefined and ambiguous political platform, ideology, principles, and indeterminate political goals vie for crucial government positions. Why is this situation dangerous? What makes the multi-party system dangerous to our lives, freedom and future is the fact that all existing political parties today do not have explicit political ideologies and principles.

Is the 1987 Constitution under siege? There had been many attempts to challenge- or desecrate- the new Constitution, but none of their proponents gave a rational and objective reason why it must be revised or amended. Throughout the history of the Philippines, the Filipino people were not given the right choice. One perennial problem is that the current charter of the Philippines, the 1987 Constitution, is so voluminous; the other is that it bears a lot of philosophical contradictions, a highly dangerous bromide that is furtively pushing the country toward collectivism. One may explain that the size of the new Constitution is the result of too many social clusters and pressure groups that participated in its drafting during the early months of the term of revolutionary president Corazon Aquino. In these trying political times, the new charter is under attack.

Good luck to all of us and may the God of reason and justice save this country…

The blogger simply posted the article of Lewis Gordon. Gordon’s definition of “public intellectuals” is self-serving. He wrote: “public intellectuals seem unable to talk about pressing social issues without performing the equivalent of an academic literature review. Although reasons range from trying to inform their audiences of relevant debates to efforts to demonstrate erudition, that many public intellectuals present their work as the basis for rewards in academe and the entertainment industry suggests influences tantamount to the colonization of intellectuals by the ever-expanding market.”

He also wrote the following: “In an ironic development, the anti-left quickly took advantage of at least one Marxian insight, exemplified well in Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel “Atlas Shrugged”: Attack the material conditions of the opposition. Right-wing think tanks, bloated with funding, waged war on social policies and institutions that offer safety nets for dissenting and creative left-wing and even centrist intellectuals. As public intellectuals became more academic, they increasingly relied on academic institutions for employment. So, the right hit them where it hurts.”

I have no time to read the whole article, but on the basis of the way he defined the term “public intellectuals” he’s referring to people who were able to exert ‘intellectual’ influence on the market place of ideas without performing any academic work to support their views. To Gordon, the term ‘intellectual’ is to be determined by college diploma or academic degree or citation. I think that this is one of the crudest ideas invented in the past century, when Harvard and other Ivy League schools in the US did a disservice to America. Just think of how the dangerous ideas of John Maynard Keynes got into the free-market of ideas and became an orthodoxy. Leftism and conservatism in the US proliferated because of Harvard and other “sophisticated” schools. Now that’s what the intellectuals call academic? The intellectuals reject the ideas of Mises, Hazlitt and Ayn Rand because their views are too good and reality-based. Yes, these elitist intellectuals still retain the remaining feudal mentality of their intellectual counterparts who lived during the Medieval Age wherein only the moneyed, the aristocrats and the royalists could be able to dominate and manipulate the marketplace of ideas.

The self-claimed intellectuals of today aren’t comfortable with the idea that there are “real” intellectuals like Ayn Rand, Mises, Hazlitt, among others who are now widely accepted by the thinking people. To these elitist intellectuals, “intellectuality” or intellectual recognition must be academic based. But in a free-market society, only the reality-based views and ideas will flourish. America is the best example of this ideal, while Europe in the past century fell into an intellectual elitist booby-trap. America is the first society the allowed the proliferation of opinions and views in the free-market of ideas. And like any product or commodity, it is the the best idea that attracts more people. Before Henry Ford became the guy who revolutionized car making on earth, he was called “crazy” by the doubting people, most of whom were intellectuals, when he was still starting. Nikola Tesla, the man who’s responsible for the invention of the Internet through his wireless technology discovery, was called a lunatic scientist by the so-called intellectuals of his time. The same thing happened to Ayn Rand and Ludwig Von Mises who were despised by the academics.

Harvard U glorified Keynes and popularized Keynesian economics that’s responsible for today’s financial crisis and big government in America. Yet the academics and college-bred intellectuals blame Ayn Rand and capitalism for this mess. Reason? Because they cannot accept the fact that it’s their stupidity that caused the crisis. Sad to say, Gordon is trying to revive the medieval, tribal “intellectual” meaning and atmosphere of the Dark Ages.